Re: Why does contain_leaked_vars believe MinMaxExpr is safe?
От | Noah Misch |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why does contain_leaked_vars believe MinMaxExpr is safe? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20150514041338.GA3710871@tornado.leadboat.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Why does contain_leaked_vars believe MinMaxExpr is safe? (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 09:34:53AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > MinMaxExpr is an implicit invocation of a btree comparison function. > > Are we supposing that all of those are necessarily leakproof? > > I suspect it's an oversight, because the comment gives no hint that > any such intention was present. It's been more than three years since > I committed that code (under a different function name) so my memory > is a little fuzzy, but I believe it just didn't occur to me that > MinMaxExpr could include a function call. > > I suspect it's safe in practice, but in theory it's probably a bug. Agreed; it is formally a bug. We considered[1] special trust of operator class members and decided against it. Since almost every btree opfamily member is leakproof in practice, I doubt the bug has harmed anyone. [1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20110707223526.GJ1840@tornado.leadboat.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: